Please note this is an archived topic, so it is locked and unable to be replied to. You may, however, start a new topic and refer to this topic with a link: http://www.banjohangout.org/archive/201783
Page: 1 2 3
From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/11/2011: 06:08:35
I am trying to learn to play by ear have been using the Amazing Slow Downer. I would like to get opinions regarding if I should transcribe what I hear and learn. Obviously I want to get away from tab but I wonder if the process of transcribing would make me better learn and retain what I have heard?
Thanks to any that would like to share their thought with me on this.
Ken
Augie - Posted - 03/11/2011: 06:22:07
Hi Ken, We have talked a couple times and I thought that you were into the Murphy Method, but maybe not. I think that in answer to your question above and your desire to get away from tab, I would investigate the Murphy Method (TMM). With Murphy's program you don't use tab and don't write anything down to learn it. We have started a group on BHO called Murphy's Misfits and you are welcome to join like minded folks there. Regards from an old Hoosier Augie
HSmith - Posted - 03/11/2011: 06:34:50
Hi Ken
I learnt to play by ear back in the 1970s. There was no other way then, as here in the UK there were no banjo teachers, and written tuition materials were very hard to find. I ruined a lot of vynil albums playing them at half speed and constantly lifting and replacing the stylus !
Whilst it's undoubtedly easier to learn to play today with the wealth of tabs and books around, I strongly believe it's detrimental to rely on tabs and neglect the (admittedly difficult) skill of learning by ear.
I don't think you'd achieve more by tabbing what you learn by ear. I guess you'd always have it written down should you forget a piece. However, I find that things I learnt by ear many years ago, and then put aside, can be recalled from memory surprisingly quickly. I think this may be because there is so much concentration necessary to learn by ear, the tune becomes very deeply ingrained.
I hope you persevere with your efforts in learning by ear. I'm sure you'll find that the effort is very worthwhile.
Harry
Carlos Benavides - Posted - 03/11/2011: 07:48:08
Great question Ken. I too have been wondering about this same issue.
I've read advice from professional musicians of all instruments (including Bela Fleck) who have said that transcribing is an essential part of training the musical ear. Or, that in their early musical training they spent a lot of time on transcribing. I had always assumed that they meant write it all down.
And here on the Hangout too, many folks are saying: forget about tab and start emulating what we hear on records as played by Earl or JD or Sonny or whoever. I think that's a wonderful idea and I'd really like to get started, but the question still remains. Are we supposed to write this stuff down after learning it by ear?
Ken, last week I decided to learn a few lines from a Scruggs tune using ASD software, figured it out quite well, and today I can't remember it at all. But I do have memory of how it kinda goes. Perhaps the point here is that after doing it for so long, the skill grows and memory sets in.
seanray - Posted - 03/11/2011: 07:52:04
Transcribing is an outstanding learning tool if you have the patience. It's by no means essential to playing banjo well but it certainly won't hurt. Even making up your own arrangements and tabbing them out properly requires a fair bit of effort but again it's a great learning tool.
Try it out and see if you like it and remember the first one will test your patience and frustration threshold but it does get easier.
eagleisland - Posted - 03/11/2011: 07:55:49
My experience, fwiw: I prefer to learn a song by ear - but while doing so, I absolutely DO transcribe and tab out the song unless it's blatantly simple and darned close to unforgettable. The more complex the song, the more important it is for me to tab it out - at least, the most challenging or ambiguous parts (case in point: right now, the 7th measure of Ron Stewart's fabulous intro break to "Little Cabin In The Lane" from the Boxcars CD is giving me conniptions, and tabbing it is essential in figuring out what in hell he did to make it sound so cool. And I'm still working on it!).
Reason for this? My band currently has about 70 songs in its repertoire and I have about 20 more that have arrangements that make me smile. There isn't time to practice all of them on a regular basis. If I want to play something that I'm rusty on, I can go back and check the tab instead of working a given passage all over again. It saves time.
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/11/2011: 08:08:11
Hi Ken,
I'm glad to hear that you are pursuing the path of Self-Learning Enlightenment (without the crutch that tab provides)! 
I agree completely with everything that Harry (HSmith) said above.
It is much easier to recall something that you have figured out for yourself.
Another benefit of this approach is that you will be figuring out a solo one phrase at a time, which will soon enable you to substitute a phrase ("lick") from one solo into another, thus "making it your own".
It is no longer a note-for-note copy if you are mixing in phrases from other tunes, is it?
The musical term for this is "quoting", and it is a very effective way to improvise--another huge benefit.
If you learn enough licks from certain styles of bluegrass, you can not only add that flavor to songs from that style, you will be more able to create licks of your own in that style.
For example, I've always loved the banjo licks that Jimmy Martin's banjo players had to learn to play with Jimmy, and I learned enough of them to be play them at the right time in Ocean Of Diamonds, Hold What You Got, etc.
Recently one of the vocalists in our band wanted to do I Don't Do Floors, but not the way James King did it. So I tried to imagine how Jimmy Martin would have done the song, and "invented" a few banjo licks to give it the "Good 'n Country" flavor.
I suppose it is theoretically possible for someone who has learned from tab to do this, but I suspect that it would be very difficult.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of writing down in tab what you have laboriously learned, I'd suggest that instead you record yourself playing the solo at half-speed and even explaining any tricky parts (for yourself)--just as an instructor would.
Doing this will probably really lock what you have learned into your memory!
This would be the ultimate in "self-teaching".
(And then you can sell your recordings as instructional material.)
- Dave
dickinnorwich - Posted - 03/11/2011: 08:31:18
quote:
Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom
I am trying to learn to play by ear have been using the Amazing Slow Downer. I would like to get opinions regarding if I should transcribe what I hear and learn. Obviously I want to get away from tab but I wonder if the process of transcribing would make me better learn and retain what I have heard?
Thanks to any that would like to share their thought with me on this.
Ken
In the interests of full disclosure, let me say up front that Ken Hydinger and I have been good friends for a long time....more than 30 years.....back when I had hair and could still play a respectable game of tennis and could at least hold my own with Ken, who is a pro and has dedicated his life to the sport.
Secondly, in the past few days, Ken has sent me slowed down versions of a couple of fiddle tunes I'm trying to learn. There is no question that The Slow Downer is a great tool for that.
But I think the bigger question Ken is raising is very important because it gets right to the heart of the learning process: 1) How does it occur? 2) Is there a good/better/more efficient way to learn? And most important, what are the purposes to which that learning will be put.
While my forte is in the building end of the business, I have run a regular jam for the past 20 years. Our jam has tried to integrate new players with more advanced players and in this setting, I have had the opportunity to observe and participate in the learning process, both for myself and with others.
I think the big answer to Ken's question has to do with the purposes for which the learning is occurring. That is, if you have no inclination to play outside the home with others in a jam situation, then that is one condition where certain types of learning tools are useful. But if the purpose of your learning is to play in a group/jam setting, then that requires a different type of learning process and requires different skill sets and learning tools. This is why we have the Murphy Method....God bless her.
Most beginners start out trying to learn a song note-for-note from tab the way somebody else played it. Like Earl. In the old days, we didn't have tab and had to slow down records. Slow Downer is really a more sophisticated digital variation of that earlier tool we used. So in that context, it's a great tool.
But there are two problems I see with this: 1) It doesn't help you understand the structure of the music, the chords on which a tune is built; and, 2) It doesn't help you develop your own style.
Cutting right to the chase, no two people have brains wired the same way. So the notion that you can, or should, play a song note for note the way I do is faulty. What we find is that students who learn songs note for note the way somebody else played them frequently get lost in the middle of the song because they don't have a bigger vision of the structure and they aren't playing the instrument "naturally, " which is to say allowing their fingers to roll the way their brains are naturally wired.
For me, my preferred way of learning a new tune is to block out the chord structure and then allow my brain/fingers to naturally find the way they want to pick out the melody within the chord structure. I learned this from experience. When you get to a jam and somebody else introduces a new song you never heard....in a weird key, then the first thing you have to learn, real quickly, is the chord structure. Pure and simple, this is Murphy Method, on steroids.
If Slow Downer (or tab) is used simply as tool to help you understand the structure of the tune, great. If you want to learn tunes note for note the way somebody else played it, also fine. But note for note learning has enormous risks when playing in a jam setting especially with people you don't know whose timing or phrasing may be unusual. This is the main problem I see with this type of tool.
From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/11/2011: 10:46:43
Wow!
Thank you all for your replies and the time, effort and thought it took to post them. There are some really great thoughts here from people with outstanding experience and knowledge.
It also makes me want to thank Eric for starting this website. Here I am with a question and I can ask it from my own house and get great answers. In the old days there would have no one for me to ask this of.
Again, thank you all,
Ken
Edited by - From Greylock to Bean Blossom on 03/11/2011 10:49:41
Richard Dress - Posted - 03/11/2011: 11:02:16
I think Dick explained it very well. Right on the money.
Ken, I worry that you are trying to find salvation in complexity (if you will permit this flight of fancy). A better way of learning by ear is to approach it from the top down, as Dick suggests, rather than flounder around in the swamp of details (even though there are gems scattered in there).
Yeah, Eric deserves a lot of credit for providing this resource. Serious questions be posed and answered by an interesting spectrum of expertise.
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/11/2011: 18:49:37
quote:
Originally posted by dickinnorwich
[quote] Most beginners start out trying to learn a song note-for-note from tab the way somebody else played it. Like Earl. In the old days, we didn't have tab and had to slow down records. Slow Downer is really a more sophisticated digital variation of that earlier tool we used. So in that context, it's a great tool.
But there are two problems I see with this: 1) It doesn't help you understand the structure of the music, the chords on which a tune is built; and, 2) It doesn't help you develop your own style.
Cutting right to the chase, no two people have brains wired the same way. So the notion that you can, or should, play a song note for note the way I do is faulty. What we find is that students who learn songs note for note the way somebody else played them frequently get lost in the middle of the song because they don't have a bigger vision of the structure and they aren't playing the instrument "naturally, " which is to say allowing their fingers to roll the way their brains are naturally wired.
Dick in Norwich,
I'm a bit confused.
It sounds like you are saying that learning note-for-note from tab is not an effective way to learn, and I agree.
Are you also saying that learning a solo note-for-note by ear is also not an effective way to learn?
If so, what is your reasoning?
Dave
steve davis - Posted - 03/11/2011: 19:02:13
I like the freedom of using either or both.
Writing stuff down in tab is a great way to save ideas and tunes.
Playing well by ear is a great way to easily fit into spontaneous music.
Jim Yates - Posted - 03/11/2011: 19:54:20
Like eagleisland and Steve Davis, I like the idea of using both. If I think of a neat lick or idea, I don't want to rely on my memory to hang onto it. The same goes for remembering a song idea I might get. I write down the lyrics in English and the tune in standard notation. For banjo licks I find tab is a quick and easy method to record things. Writing something also helps me to remember tunes and licks. Once I've written it, I seem to be able to visualize it.
As for not wanting to sound like everyone else, great, but how many of us never use a lick that we've ever heard anyone else use? I doubt that I've played anything but a fiddle tune note for note the same way I heard it, but I often hear licks and ideas that I apply to my own tunes. Come on, admit it. You do too.
From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/12/2011: 05:36:36
Dave,
Right now I am working on Blue Ridge Cabin Home. The first thing I did is to learn the melody so I could play the melody notes with Lester singing - no rolls. Then I listened for where Earl put in what John Boulding calls Scruggisms - where the slides hammers and pulls go into melody notes and embellish them. Then I try to get the rolls to join them all together and in the same places/time as Scruggs. However sometimes I think I have it and the timing is good but when double checking what I have learned from ear with "The Book", I see there may be a part where I am using a forward roll and Earl is using an alternating thumb roll. Would you advise that I try to learn it like Earl to the point of getting my fill notes the same as his or do you think learning it to the point I have described is serving the purpose of full development?
Thanks as always for your time.
Ken
Edited by - From Greylock to Bean Blossom on 03/12/2011 05:37:55
Prof - Posted - 03/12/2011: 06:01:43
Ken -- this is a great thread! I often do a forward roll filler, which usually "works," but as you said isn't what I find in "the book." I guess it comes down to if you want your tune to sound exactly like the version you are learning from, or are happy with a good approximation. I've learned Steve Martin's "The Crow" mainly from tab, but there are portions in there that I just cant get the rolls going the way they were tabbed out. So, at least for the moment, I'm satisfied at finding a pretty good representation of the song without it being a carbon copy.
Edited by - Prof on 03/12/2011 06:05:23
Richard Dress - Posted - 03/12/2011: 06:32:05
Ken,
Earl tried to use his thumb a lot and that meant he had to do a lot of TITMs to get back on track. Very few people can tell the difference., because Earl was so smooth. The is no good reason to worry about these minor issues. Just keep on picking.
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/12/2011: 07:40:15
quote:
Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom
However sometimes I think I have it and the timing is good but when double checking what I have learned from ear with "The Book", I see there may be a part where I am using a forward roll and Earl is using an alternating thumb roll.
Keep in mind that the tab in "The Book" transcribes a particular recording of Earl playing that song, and identifies that recording. If you are trying to copy a different recording of a different performance, there's no guarantee that the transcription would be the same. Chances are, it wouldn't as, according to Earl, he rarely played anything twice exactly the same way.
dickinnorwich - Posted - 03/12/2011: 08:09:12
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
quote:
Originally posted by dickinnorwich
[quote] Most beginners start out trying to learn a song note-for-note from tab the way somebody else played it. Like Earl. In the old days, we didn't have tab and had to slow down records. Slow Downer is really a more sophisticated digital variation of that earlier tool we used. So in that context, it's a great tool.
But there are two problems I see with this: 1) It doesn't help you understand the structure of the music, the chords on which a tune is built; and, 2) It doesn't help you develop your own style.
Cutting right to the chase, no two people have brains wired the same way. So the notion that you can, or should, play a song note for note the way I do is faulty. What we find is that students who learn songs note for note the way somebody else played them frequently get lost in the middle of the song because they don't have a bigger vision of the structure and they aren't playing the instrument "naturally, " which is to say allowing their fingers to roll the way their brains are naturally wired.
Dick in Norwich,
I'm a bit confused.
It sounds like you are saying that learning note-for-note from tab is not an effective way to learn, and I agree.
Are you also saying that learning a solo note-for-note by ear is also not an effective way to learn?
If so, what is your reasoning?
Dave:
I think what I was trying to say was that learning a song note for note the way somebody else plays it is certainly O.K.... if that style just so happens happens to suit your style. But the bigger issue I was addressing had to do with learning by stringing notes together without understanding the larger chord structure in which they were occurring. I don't know about you guys and gals but I don't think I ever play a song the same way, ever. I'm thinking in the chord context, not the "next note" context.
Maybe one could just as easily argue that my approach is sloppy and lacks discipline.
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/12/2011: 08:36:21
quote:
Originally posted by dickinnorwich
I think what I was trying to say was that learning a song note for note the way somebody else plays it is certainly O.K.... if that style just so happens happens to suit your style. But the bigger issue I was addressing had to do with learning by stringing notes together without understanding the larger chord structure in which they were occurring. I don't know about you guys and gals but I don't think I ever play a song the same way, ever. I'm thinking in the chord context, not the "next note" context.
Maybe one could just as easily argue that my approach is sloppy and lacks discipline.
I don't think your two points of view are all that different. Dick, it looks like you are focusing on the chord structure of the song, and then, within that structure, expressing the melody using patterns that come naturally to your fingers. But since you reference the Murphy Method several times, it also looks like you find the licks and phrases from the songs she teaches among the things that come naturally to you when trying to express the melody in this fashion.
I think that what Dave is saying is that there are other ways of internalizing licks and phrases so they will later come naturally to you -- that you can study and copy Earl's phrases by ear from his recordings for this purpose as effectively as copying the licks Murphy teaches. In both cases you still have to figure out where these phrases fit smoothly in new material.
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/12/2011: 09:11:29
quote:
Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom
Dave,
However sometimes I think I have it and the timing is good but when double checking what I have learned from ear with "The Book", I see there may be a part where I am using a forward roll and Earl is using an alternating thumb roll. Would you advise that I try to learn it like Earl to the point of getting my fill notes the same as his or do you think learning it to the point I have described is serving the purpose of full development?
Ken
Hi Ken,
Congratulations on really exploring the learn-by-ear method!
Isn't it more fun to play along with the Foggy Mtn Boys than with a metronome?
Isn't it a kick to play along with Earl to capture those little nuances that he was such a master of, and notice that for a few phrases, you are maybe starting to sound a little bit like him?
As you are searching around on the fingerboard for those elusive notes of Earl's, are you finding cool little licks of your own?
I never got bored playing along with F&S!
To answer your question, I would say it is your personal choice as to how closely to copy Earl note-for-note.
Some very good players I know personally have memorized Earl's solos exactly note-for-note, and it always amazes me because I just can't remember all of those note sequences like they can!
After all, a 16-bar solo will have around 128 eighth-notes--and that's a lot to remember!
I myself usually just try to get fairly close to Earl just like you are describing.
I think I usually try to get least at the first line as close as possible to Earl so the audience and the band recognize the solo. Then I try to insert a few of Earl's cool "signature" licks--for example how he leads into the IV chord in Blue Ridge Cabin Home, and neat little lick he does on the V chord.
The rest I play the way I feel at that moment--the creative part.
As others have pointed out, if you listen to live recordings of Earl, he did much the same thing.
In other words, even Earl didn't usually copy every note of his own solos--depending on the song. For example, I got to see Lester & Earl live several times growing up and listened to them a lot on WSM, and I'm pretty sure that he played Ballad of Jed Clampett, The Martha White Theme, and a few others exactly as they were recorded.
I learned to play a couple of years before The Book (Earl's) came out, and I did the same thing as you-- I checked it out to see how close I had got to the way Earl played the solos I had learned on my own. I was pretty close on some and missed others by a mile!
In the early 1970s, I once got to ask Haskell McCormick (who I believe was the first banjo-player to replace Earl after Lester and Earl split up) if Lester wanted him to copy Earl's solos off the recordings, and he said that Lester left it up to him to decide.
As I recall, Haskell told me that for the most part he just tried to capture the essence of Earl's solos, but didn't usually play the whole solo note-for-note. So I figured if that was good enough for Earl's replacement, it was good enough for me.
On the other hand, at this stage of your learning, since you have BRCH down "pretty darn close", you might want to move on to another song, and come back to BRCH in a month or so, to see of you can learn to play the alternating thumb roll exactly like Earl--purely as a learning exercise.
It might be useful to learn HOW to do it, even if you don't actually DO it every time.
Because one of the beautiful things about Earl's playing is how he mixed various rolls together to vary the texture of his playing.
But-- before you move on from BRCH, make sure to learn as much of Earl's backup as you can.
As I recall, Earl had some great backup stuff in that song, and one signature backup "hook" after the second line of the chorus that is a "must learn".
If you play that hook lick, you are guaranteed to get a smile from the other band members--maybe even from that cute girl playing the bass and singing the high-baritone part.
You asked me, and that's my 2 cents on the subject.
Remember, advice is usually worth what you pay for it--especially mine!
Dave
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/12/2011: 10:15:13
quote:
Originally posted by dickinnorwich
Dave:
I think what I was trying to say was that learning a song note for note the way somebody else plays it is certainly O.K.... if that style just so happens happens to suit your style. But the bigger issue I was addressing had to do with learning by stringing notes together without understanding the larger chord structure in which they were occurring. I don't know about you guys and gals but I don't think I ever play a song the same way, ever. I'm thinking in the chord context, not the "next note" context.
Maybe one could just as easily argue that my approach is sloppy and lacks discipline.
Hi Dick,
It sounds like we are in agreement.
I believe that it is all about what one's personal goals are with playing the banjo.
Far be it from me to criticize anyone's choices or aspirations.
For "bedroom pickers" with no further aspirations, it doesn't matter what you play.
For people who have no aspirations beyond "slow jams", it probably doesn't matter very much.
For those who aspire to play in heavy-duty jams and really contribute, it starts to matter.
For those of us who aspire to playing in a hard-driving traditional bluegrass band that is good enough to perform at festivals or bars for money, it matters a lot. At that level, most bands expect you to be familiar with and be able to play fairly close to the solos, and in the style of, the original version-- whether it is material from F&S, The Stanley Bros, Reno & Smiley, etc.
Exact note-for-note is not usually a requirement-- "pretty darn close" usually will do just fine. Unless you aspired to play with Jimmy Martin, in which case you were required to play the banjo solos in his songs exactly as the original was recorded.
(I know that there are several ex-Sunny Mountain Boys on this forum, so I hope that they will correct me if I'm wrong about this.)
As I mentioned in my reply to Ken just above, inserting some signature licks usually gets a smile and kind words from the rest of the band.
I often get called in as a sub with one band just because I've learned a few Ralph and JD licks along with Earl licks, and usually manage to insert them in the right places.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was worried, Dick, that you were in that camp against learning other players' solos and licks because "it isn't creative", and I'm glad to hear that you are not.
For those people who claim that learning other people's solos isn't "creative", I would ask them if learning over a hundred of Earl's solos exactly note-for-note hampered Bill Keith's creativity, or if learning JD Crowe's solos note-for-note when he was in Jimmy Martin's band hampered Alan Munde's creativity.
I know for a fact that David Grisman knows just about every solo Bill Monroe ever recorded note-for-note--it certainly hasn't hampered his creativity.
All artists first learn from the masters.
-Art students copy Renoir or Monet to learn their different styles.
-Jazz musicians copy Charlie Parker or Dizzie Gillespie to learn their different styles.
-Banjo players who aspire to play in a band learn solos and licks from Earl, Don, Ralph, JD, etc., and then go from there.
Truly creative people learn from the masters, then "stand on their shoulders" as they go in their own creative direction.
You need to fully understand the idiom before you can be creative within it.
I was fortunate enough to get to jam with David Grisman just a few months ago. He is able to improvise on a Monroe song--and still sound like Bill Monroe! He doesn't need to mix in his Dawg music to be creative on Toy Heart.
Okay, I'll get off my soapbox for now.
Dave
Edited by - Dave Magram on 03/12/2011 10:24:58
minstrelmike - Posted - 03/12/2011: 10:33:53
Retyping Hemingway is _not_ creative.
After you've written a few scenes, retyping or studying Hemingway gives you some insight.
You do _not_ get insight, or at least as much insight, into how to actually write tho until you've actually tried it yourself.
My criticism or warning or just insight into the cons (everything has plusses as well as minuses) of learning transcribed breaks by ear is that it isn't a good way for beginners to learn how to play. For them, it essentially becomes paint by number and then folks argue if painting by number thru ear or tab or teacher or DVD is better than some other way of copying.
If you have _never_ worked out your own solo, then you don't really know what's involved, or what choices are available, and for beginners, you don't even know what the difference is between the song and the arrangement.
Once you've worked out even two or three simple breaks to even simple songs, you have a better idea of what's going on and can then realize the difference between the words sung to Cripple Creek and that fancy thing you are doing with your fingers.
Then, learning other people's breaks is actual learning for you instead of being mere rote copying.
It's a lot easier to paint a copy of the Mona Lisa from a picture of the current painting than it is to paint a picture of some lady sitting in front of you. And the skills involved in those two different activities aren't that similar.
Richard Dress - Posted - 03/12/2011: 11:04:00
I like the Mona Liza Jane analogy. I give it ***** (5 stars).
Some people are satisfied with copying the original or even paint the original by numbers. That's fine but most pickers want to be able to paint like an real artist does. The only path to becoming a real artist in your analogy would be to paint the real lady in front of you over and over. I think that's right on--it's an important consideration for any beginner learning the banjo.
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/12/2011: 11:46:56
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
For "bedroom pickers" with no further aspirations, it doesn't matter what you play.
For people who have no aspirations beyond "slow jams", it probably doesn't matter very much.
For those who aspire to play in heavy-duty jams and really contribute, it starts to matter.
For those of us who aspire to playing in a hard-driving traditional bluegrass band that is good enough to perform at festivals or bars for money, it matters a lot. At that level, most bands expect you to be familiar with and be able to play fairly close to the solos, and in the style of, the original version-- whether it is material from F&S, The Stanley Bros, Reno & Smiley, etc.
I strongly suspect that most banjo players (above the beginning stage) fit into
none of these categories. They've gotten out of the bedroom, progressed beyond the "slow" jam to regular jams with friends, neighbors, and other music lovers -- but these are friendly, not "heavy-duty" gatherings, and few aspire to play in a "hard-driving traditional bluegrass band that is good enough to perform at festivals or bars for money."
The reason I started a thread about "recreational banjo playing" some weeks back is that it seems like the vast majority of us are bypassed in some of these discussions. Other instrument instruction seems to understand the concept of the avid, recreational player. Piano instruction recognizes that people who aspire to play pop songs should be taught differently than people who aspire to play Mozart. [My favorite instruction book title is "How to Play the Piano Despite Years of Lessons."] Guitar instruction recognizes that someone can have a heck of a lot of fun playing with others after learning a limited number of chords, a few strumming patterns, and buying a capo.
Banjo instruction has a lot of difficult grappling with that concept. Many beginner bluegrass banjo instruction books teach melodic-style, single-string, and D tuning -- skills which, IMHO, are unnecessary for the recreational player. Certainly, more teach these things than teach you how to approach a common jam song which you never have played in the key that's been selected, a skill that it vitally important.
I'm not advocating superficiality exactly, but the truth is that at a regular jam (where most of us play), most of what you are playing is not intended to stand out, but to blend, and your one-verse break needn't be particularly fancy. Knowing how to play everything moderately well is more important than knowing how to play anything exceptionally well.
People who give instructional advice should remember this.
minstrelmike - Posted - 03/12/2011: 11:56:38
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
...it seems like the vast majority of us are bypassed in some of these discussions. Other instrument instruction seems to understand the concept of the avid, recreational player. Piano instruction recognizes that people who aspire to play pop songs should be taught differently than people who aspire to play Mozart. [My favorite instruction book title is "How to Play the Piano Despite Years of Lessons."]...
That's where I'm at with most of my comments all over this forum. And I agree that piano book is the best.
and a shout out thanx to Richard for the 5 stars
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/12/2011: 12:13:44
quote:
Originally posted by minstrelmike
That's where I'm at with most of my comments all over this forum.
You certainly are. And others are, too. But I think you'd agree that this is an under-represented point of view.
Old Hickory - Posted - 03/12/2011: 13:02:43
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Yates
As for not wanting to sound like everyone else, great, but how many of us never use a lick that we've ever heard anyone else use? I doubt that I've played anything but a fiddle tune note for note the same way I heard it, but I often hear licks and ideas that I apply to my own tunes. Come on, admit it. You do too.
Much needed dose of honesty and reality, Jim.
This is exactly why I slow down tunes or solos I'm trying to learn by ear. Once I start playing them up to speed, I rarely play everything exactly as the recorded artist did. But I do exactly as you said and focus on the licks that drew me to the recroded version in the first place. Even then, I don't necessarily play them exactly as they were recorded. But they're there for me to call on.
And to answer the original post and agree with several previous answer -- I write down anything I can't trust myself to remember. I disagree with anyone who says tab is not a way to learn, or is a bad way to learn, or all the other negative things people are saying about tab.
From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/12/2011: 13:52:19
Gentlemen,
Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I am greatly appreciative of your time and thoughts. Let me explain where I am coming from on this thread. First I am not a beginner and have been playing for more years than I am comfortable stating because my play is so poor. I can play a song pretty quickly by ear incorporating the melody notes into rolls. I can play songs memorized out of the Scruggs book and some songs form the Murphy Henry Advance Earl DVD. But because of having a job for many years that often required 60+ hours per week and often having to working up to 70-80 days in a row I did not have the time to be devoted to the banjo. Now because of 1. Time available, 2. Really insightful instruction from private lessons, and 3. Good tools (like the Amazing Slow Downer), I feel like I have the chance to learn to play. At this point in life my chances for achievements are not as numerous as they once were. But I have always loved the banjo and want to be satisfied with the way I play it. I feel that I am a somewhat serious student of the banjo and post this with that level of study in mind.
I want to emphasize that this thread was not about the much discussed tab versus ear learning for beginners. My intent of this thread was to find if transcribing – writing into tab- what I learned by ear, would reinforce what I learned. I was also concerned that it could retard my learning and my progress by making me less reliant upon memory and ear learning. I was concerned that if I transcribe that I might just hear, write, and forget. I want to hear and internalize and was wanting to know what part transcribing can play in that.
Early in my life as Dickinnorwich mentioned I tried to play tennis at a good level. In the course of doing that we would play practice matches and try to emulate a great player in both their technique (hitting the ball) and strategy. From those experiments that we grew into a greater variety of shot making skills as well as being comfortable with playing in different styles which helped us later as we had to solve various problems that would be presented by future opponents. Also we would observe at every opportunity possible the best players in the world. We spent hours sitting courtside at their practice sessions and matches observing what they did and trying to figure what they thought.
So please understand my background as I try to emulate Scruggs and look for your alls expertise to help me do it best. My desire to learn Scruggs by ear and note for note has to do with a similar process. Through many positing and letters Dave Magram has given me much encouragement and insight as to this thought process as has my teacher John Boulding. I try to learn Scruggs well for many reasons. One is that I understand he plays with such variety and from him I will learn many ways to approach a melodic phrase, endings, fills etc. For example he plays so many different D chord filler phrases following an “A” note at the end of a line. Left to my own inclination I would repeat the same pattern each time and my playing is boring and repetitive. So from Scruggs I hope to get variety as well as the ability play the melody the clearest and most interesting way.
Another reason I want to learn Scruggs note for note is because I have heard so many great players say they learned from slowing Scruggs down and listening. Scruggs fundamentals to me seem to me the bedrock from which most good players (the ones I enjoy the most) have built their foundation upon. I have a great respect for tradition and proven ability and listening and emulating is a proven if difficult means of learning. If people as talented as Osborne, Ingram, and Crowe did this, who am I not to?
Guys, I am a hack and may always be a hack but I am going to try to be better. But please understand this is not about beginning banjo methods or tab versus ear. I also e-mailed Bill Keith on this as he has done some of the most significant transcribing that I know of and I wondered what part it played in his study of Scruggs. If he responds and lets me post his thoughts, I will do so.
Again I thank you all very much for your thoughtful and informative responses but I just wanted to try to be clear where I was coming from.
Thanks,
Ken
Edited by - From Greylock to Bean Blossom on 03/12/2011 13:55:26
minstrelmike - Posted - 03/12/2011: 15:00:19
I don't know that writing the stuff down per se would make you less reliant.
I know for me learning words, writing them down reinforces the words. I used to write them all the time then after I got on the web, I didn't. I'd just cut and paste and work on memorizing while driving or something.
But it never seemed to take. Any more, I retype the words into my master songbook and have far fewer problems remembering them. Not sure if that would translate to licks or not.
Richard Dress - Posted - 03/12/2011: 15:23:30
Ken,
Threads never go the way you want them to go. Threads are naturally perverse in that way. But even if they wander, they can still provide good information. Since there is no way to make an objective determination of what it is about your picking that is bothering you, I assume the worst case.
From my own experience some clues resonate, 1) generally bad picking 2) working at it for years. I gotta conclude that it is a rhythm problem, not a banjo skill or knowledge problem. Rhythm is the foundation of all picking. Bad foundation, bad picking.
Learning Scruggs is always worthwhile, but the learning is much more effective after fixing the rhythm. You clearly are not a beginner, but that doesn't mean you are ready to put time in on more advanced stuff right now. The pickers who learned Earl's stuff were also all musicians first. Even Earl was a musician first, before he learned his stuff. If he didn't have a good rhythm, then playing 'Reuben' wouldn't have gone on to eventually bloom into his three-finger style.
So the real answer to your question could honestly be saying "no" to the general approach you outline. Yes, transcribing can help you learn that, but should you be learning that now?
As a tennis coach do you see rhythm problems causing people trouble? Could tennis even be possible without a basic control and exercise of body rhythm? Could you honestly recognize this in yourself as it applies to playing bluegrass banjo? It's not so easy to see one's self objectively. If this makes sense to you, then try this:
Make a video of your self picking the banjo and look for the tell-tale give-away. The clue is locked upper shoulders and lower neck. Check it out. It shows up clearly on video.
Good luck. Don't give up because you really can do it if you try.
Edited by - Richard Dress on 03/12/2011 15:25:20
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/12/2011: 15:53:49
quote:
Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom
My intent of this thread was to find if transcribing – writing into tab- what I learned by ear, would reinforce what I learned. I was also concerned that it could retard my learning and my progress by making me less reliant upon memory and ear learning. I was concerned that if I transcribe that I might just hear, write, and forget. I want to hear and internalize and was wanting to know what part transcribing can play in that.
Everyone is different. For me, anything that gets between my ear and my fingers has the potential to mess me up. It's not a matter of becoming "less reliant upon memory and ear learning." Rather, it's a mental detour -- right brain to left brain, if you're into such distinctions -- that creates, for me, wiring problems. But, then again, I'm not doing the kind of project you are doing.
From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/12/2011: 16:11:13
Thanks Richard,
I have read your banjo hero and know what you have said about musicianship, relaxation and rhythm... and how you made leaps as a player after many years. I am sure that is part of the problem especially as it relates to consistency. I spoke to Brian Lappin who plays here in town but who also played with Jimmy Martin. Brian is a fine fine player. Brian spoke like a sports psychologist talking about his being able to play well and overcome getting in a bad situation due to the ability to relax and keep in the present, and focus.
But I have to say part of my problem was a knowledge problem. John has shown me how to go about playing a melody and doing it in a way that is not as repetitive as I was. He has shown me how to really play the melody. The things he has shown me enable me to hear a Scruggs and Crowe solo and and least be able to understand the basis of how they created it and how they added the spice to it while keeping the melody intact. Before I was memorizing parts and not understanding the theory. Each song to me was like reinventing the wheel. I think maybe the more you know what you are doing the more you can relax and when relaxed you can have rhythm.
Some thoughts going through my head. In athletics we are taught the pathway sequence to good performance is motivate, relax, and concentrate. I was reading an old BNL (Jan 1981 Rob Sax). He talked about a follow up thought to a Tony Ulrich article on speed. Rob said that Sonny Osborne talked about (in an April 1980 article) of thinking only what your left hand was doing and implied that the r. hand would do what it needed. Kind of a Zen thing: your mind can't be in two places at the time time and getting tight when you think too much. Sorry don't know where this is going but just a few thoughts stirred by your comments and what I just read.
Also please understand this thread has been great for me and I have picked up tons of ideas. I just thought there may have been a misunderstanding and that some guys were going down the same path. I appreciate the twists and turns and the general conversation.
thanks,
Ken
Jody Hughes - Posted - 03/12/2011: 21:25:55
Hey Ken,
I think you should start by trying to figure out the chord changes by ear, preferably songs that only consists of three chords until you can hear those easy.
Then learn the melody. If you can't hear the chord changes the melody will often spell it out for you.
Everyone has their own stories, but for me, it wasn't until I started figuring out nearly everything by ear from recordings that I began to gain the skill of playing with others well. I would sit and play the backup and then when the banjo went into lead, I'd play along with it. Lastly, learning other peoples breaks note for note (or as close as I could get them) never dampened my ability to obtain a style of my own.
I think it depends on what type of learner you are as to whether or not it will help you retain it better. I find I retain things learned by ear better. Regardless of the method, all material has to be revisited constantly for awhile.
Edited by - Jody Hughes on 03/12/2011 21:28:53
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/13/2011: 03:59:46
I completely agree with what Jody Hughes wrote above.
If you haven't listened to Jody play, check out his audioclips!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich W, MinstrelMike, Richard D,
I’ve been playing banjo a long time on a professional or semi-professional basis and have taught a number of people how to play the banjo.
I joined this forum last fall with the primary intention of helping beginners get started playing the banjo. I am not selling anything or looking for students, just trying to help out people who want to play banjo. I do not claim to be the World’s Leading Expert on Banjo-Playing, but I believe that I may have something to offer those who are starting out or are feeling “stuck”.
When I see misinformation being promoted as facts, I feel obligated to point this out so that beginners don’t make the mistake of believing the misinformation.
I have never seen so much misinformation, faulty logic, and specious reasoning in one place as the three of you have posted above.
First, let me restate my basic premise, since all three of you seem to have missed it or ignored it.
I am making suggestions for learning how to play bluegrass in the style of Earl Scruggs.
I assume that there are a quite a few people out there who would like to sound like Earl, and would like to play in a bluegrass band some day.
These are what I would call SERIOUS BLUEGRASS BANJO PLAYERS, and this is who I am targeting my recommendations to.
These folks are not to be confused with players who have no interest in sounding like Earl or have no interest in playing in a traditional bluegrass band or have no interest in playing in “serious” bluegrass jam sessions.
These folks are also not to be confused with players that Rich W describes below.
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
quote:
The reason I started a thread about "recreational banjo playing" some weeks back is that it seems like the vast majority of us are bypassed in some of these discussions.
Rich, I’m not exactly sure what a “recreational player” is, but I’m pretty certain it is NOT who I am describing when I explain that my recommendations are for SERIOUS BLUEGRASS BANJO PLAYERS.
Rich, there is nothing wrong with not aspiring to play in a bluegrass band, but please do not confuse the issue by talking about apples, when I have made it clear that I am talking about oranges.
And what evidence do you have that the majority of banjo players do not aspire to play in a band someday?
That is completely contrary to my experience when I have given banjo workshops at bluegrass festivals.
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
quote:
Knowing how to play everything moderately well is more important than knowing how to play anything exceptionally well.
Gee, Rich that sounds to me like the definition of “mediocrity”.
Is mediocrity what you are aspiring to?
Why not try to play “exceptionally well” instead?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by minstrelmike
Retyping Hemingway is _not_ creative.
Minstrelmike, you have thoroughly confused COPYING versus LEARNING, and compounded your error by utilizing a fallacious analogy and faulty reasoning.
Retyping Hemingway is not LEARNING anything, it is only COPYING in an unproductive manner.
The banjo analogy to this would be retyping someone else’s tablature.
Obviously no learning is taking place in either situation, just copying.
I certainly did not recommend that.
Since the word COPYING seems to be confusing, allow me to rephrase what I wrote to clarify what I said in my previous post by using the word “emulate” instead of “copy”.
Using your Hemingway analogy, I would recommend that you LEARN Hemingway’s STYLE by EMULATING his vocabulary and sentence structure enough so that you can write an original piece in the STYLE of Hemingway.
This is not “retyping Hemingway”—it is EMULATING his STYLE.
What I am recommending is that the most effective way to LEARN Earl Scruggs’ STYLE is by EMULATING his musical vocabulary and the way he structured his musical phrases.
This is the approach used by at least 99% of all the great banjo-players such as Sonny, JD, Ralph, Bill Keith, and many hundreds more.
It seemed to have worked fairly well for those great players, didn’t it?
As to your comments on creativity, whose creativity would you say suffered the most from this approach—Sonny, JD, Ralph, or Bill Keith?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Dress
The only path to becoming a real artist in your analogy would be to paint the real lady in front of you over and over. I think that's right on--it's an important consideration for any beginner learning the banjo.
With all due respect, Richard, you do not know what you are talking about.
As it happens, one of my sons is completing his Bachelor of Fine Arts this May from a highly regarded university arts program.
In his first year, he was required to spend many hours at art museums and with art books “copying” drawings and paintings of masters such as Da Vinci and Renoir. The idea was not to COPY every line of the master artist, but to EMULATE the STYLE of these master artists, so as to add to the student’s artistic “vocabulary”.
This copying of the work of great artists preceded the Life Drawing classes using live models. Because in the Life Drawing classes, they might be asked to draw the live model in the style of Da Vinci or Renoir.
Do you understand the parallels?
Does that help you understand the relevance of the visual arts learning process to how Sonny, JD, Ralph, Keith, and many hundreds more learned to play Scruggs-style banjo?
- Dave
Edited by - Dave Magram on 03/13/2011 04:02:43
Jazz Country - Posted - 03/13/2011: 06:05:14
Ken,
The key word in your last post is "knowledge." If you pursue the transcribing path as a COMPONENT of a study regimen you will become a musician who happens to play banjo instead of a banjo player. I did a ton of transcribing as part of my jazz study. Many a day a stayed home and notated an entire solo by Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, or Chet Baker, to name a few. The intention was not to merely parrot these players but to analyze how they created their phrases and *very importantly* how they weaved them into a story. It was a process of revelation to study the theory of chord tones, passing tones, leading tones, etc. and then seeing how the masters utilized them. It doesn't matter what instrument you play, the language is the same, only you might be speaking a different dialect when you cross genres. I never played a horn in my life, but studying the music of the great jazz players made me a better guitarist. When I took on the challenge of hybrid chicken pickin' I applied the same study principles and was amazed at how little time it took to understand what was going on. Technique is another story, because I'm still working on that 3 years later.
So I say jump in and try it. You'll find out in short order that you have chosen the right path towards enlightened musicianship. Don't feel bad about copying for the right purpose. Wes Montgomery learned Charlie Christian solos note for note and unabashedly played them in public. It didn't hurt him, did it? I can't speak for the great bluegrass pickers, but I'm willing to bet that a lot of them spent time at transcribing.
BTW, I use a product called Transcribe! from seventhstring.com. It has a lot more functionality then Slow Downer.
Good luck with your musical adventure.
My $.02
Larry
From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/13/2011: 07:01:01
Larry,
It sounds like you have some hard earned knowledge and insights. Thank you for sharing it and thank you for the encouragement.
Ken
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/13/2011: 08:15:07
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
The reason I started a thread about "recreational banjo playing" some weeks back is that it seems like the vast majority of us are bypassed in some of these discussions.
Rich, I’m not exactly sure what a “recreational player” is, but I’m pretty certain it is NOT who I am describing when I explain that my recommendations are for SERIOUS BLUEGRASS BANJO PLAYERS.
Rich, there is nothing wrong with not aspiring to play in a bluegrass band, but please do not confuse the issue by talking about apples, when I have made it clear that I am talking about oranges.
And what evidence do you have that the majority of banjo players do not aspire to play in a band someday?
That is completely contrary to my experience when I have given banjo workshops at bluegrass festivals.
I would be very surprised if the majority of BHO members realistically aspired to play in a professional bluegrass band. A church group, perhaps. Maybe a group that plays at some local events. But so many BHO'ers have come to the banjo in the middle of their otherwise busy lives, as a hobby -- or in retirement. They are realistic people who have developed very realistic goals. Their principal goal is to have fun with their instrument. That means playing with other people -- and a lot of us have found even that to be difficult, at least at first.
I'm not discounting the younger members, who may aspire to more, but I doubt they are a majority.
What's my evidence? The people I meet in my local bluegrass club and other local (and not-so-local) events, the other students of my banjo teacher, but mostly the folks on BHO.
When I started the "recreational banjo player" thread, I made the analogy to golf (which most of those who responded thought was a good one). Ask any teaching golf pro whether he assumes that most of his students aspire to the PGA Tour someday. He'll laugh at you.
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
Knowing how to play everything moderately well is more important than knowing how to play anything exceptionally well.
Gee, Rich that sounds to me like the definition of “mediocrity”.
Is mediocrity what you are aspiring to?
Why not try to play “exceptionally well” instead?
You're leaving out the key words in what I said. I said that knowing how to play
everything moderately well is more important that knowing how to play
anything exceptionally well. I have nothing against anyone who wants to spend hours studying every lick and phrase of "Earl's Breakdown" and "Flint Hill Special" and "Foggy Mountain Chimes" so that they can play these pieces "like Earl." I admire their dedication and envy their free time. It's just that I go to jams in three different states and I've never heard those things played. Maybe I hang out with the wrong jammers. I'm more likely to encounter lots of terrific songs which I've never played, but with a chord progression and melody I can figure out. I enjoy playing along under those circumstances to an acceptable degree of competence. The ability to play songs on the fly at a jam is a more important skill to me because I encounter that situation repeatedly.
It may sound to you like I aspire to mediocrity, but what I really aspire to is
maximum participation in the jams I attend. Having to sit out half the songs isn't fun. Gaining the ability to "light up" one or two doesn't compensate for missing the rest. I'm only interested in contributing my share to the group's sound.
Richard Dress - Posted - 03/13/2011: 08:36:55
Dave: With all due respect, Richard, you do not know what you are talking about.
Sorry, Dave, but I do. It's an analogy. If there were only two ways to go [the 'real lady' in other words 'music' or someone's tab which has no music in it] then 'real lady' is surely the right path. Even you have to admit that.
I don't think anyone was slighting you, so getting personal sort of loses the point of the thread. I didn't even consider your advice when I was posting--I was neither ignoring it or referring to it in any way. Also I never doubted that you were trying to help beginners, just like the rest of us.
Edited by - Richard Dress on 03/13/2011 08:38:44
minstrelmike - Posted - 03/13/2011: 10:06:25
People in 'real' painting course such as ones at a college do study the masters IN ADDITION to doing their own still lifes.
And they do their own still lifes before they study the masters, then they study the masters, then they do their own still lifes again. The study of masters is one component, never the only one.
Dave, like many of the folks who think there is one true path, ignores the other things that are going on in the training of the folks who become successful.
The people who take Bob Ross classes or do paint-by-number and never anything else make very little progress in real independent painting. The ones who also try to paint the trees they see in their yard and then compare it to the Bob Ross one or the paint-by-number one do advance _because_ they are practicing the real painting skills on their own.
Everybody starts doing their instrument with some kind of training. That's to start. The folks who 'succeed to become musicians' do other stuff on their own that is not part of the training such as jamming with others (remember the eye-opener that first jam was?) or creating stuff on their own.
If you never create something on your own, I don't think you learn nearly as much from intensive study of other people's creations, At best, you become a well-informed critic.
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/13/2011: 10:25:59
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
I would be very surprised if the majority of BHO members realistically aspired to play in a professional bluegrass band. A church group, perhaps. Maybe a group that plays at some local events.
Please don’t misquote me to bolster your own opinions, Rich.
I said: “And what evidence do you have that the majority of banjo players do not aspire to play in a band someday?”
I did not say “
professional bluegrass band”-- you did.
My point is that most people who perform in a band for an audience (as opposed to a jam session with no audience) want their
band to sound as good as possible. It is a team effort, not an individual one.
I have played for no pay in churches, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, etc. and I and my band-mates rehearsed just as seriously and tried to be just as entertaining and play as best as we could —exactly as we would have if we had been paid.
A band is a team effort, and just as in sports, no good player wants to let the team down.
I have been in many bands, and there is nothing like the feeling everyone gets when everything just clicks and you have four or five people playing at their best together.
(It's almost as good as sex.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to your doubts that the majority of BHO members realistically aspire to play in a band--why not ask them, Rich?
Does this forum have a polling feature?
If so, why don’t you run a poll asking how many BHO members aspire to play in a band someday?
If not, just ask the question: “How many BHO members realistically aspire to play in a band someday, either professional (paid) or amateur (unpaid)?” on a new thread?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by Rich Weill
When I started the "recreational banjo player" thread, I made the analogy to golf (which most of those who responded thought was a good one). Ask any teaching golf pro whether he assumes that most of his students aspire to the PGA Tour someday. He'll laugh at you.
Golf is okay as an analogy. Playing on a golf team is a better one--because a bluegrass band is a team effort, not an individual one.
However, as professional pollsters well know, it’s all in how one asks the question, Rich.
If you asked that same golf pro how many of his students aspire to be the best golfers in their team, foursome, or local club, I’d expect his answer to be “100%”.
-Dave
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/13/2011: 10:31:06
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Dress
I don't think anyone was slighting you, so getting personal sort of loses the point of the thread.
Thanks for your concern, Richard.
I do not feel slighted in the least.
You posted some inaccurate information, and I corrected it.
Nothing personal.
-Dave
Richard Dress - Posted - 03/13/2011: 10:33:01
Ken: I think maybe the more you know what you are doing the more you can relax and when relaxed you can have rhythm.
-----------------------------------------------
This is the folk wisdom and it does work for some people, but there has to be a modicum of musical talent to make this happy outcome possible. It didn't work for me because of the old modicum thing. The tip-off is many years of work and no acceptable result. What you are really saying is "I am going to learn a lot of banjo stuff and maybe someday it will all magically turn into music"--as I said, this does work. But if it doesn't work in the first couple of years of trying, then it's not the right path for you; something is wrong and it is interfering with what should be a natural progression from a beginner into a musician. Cramming in more of the same (i.e. technique) won't help you in this instance, because it doesn't address the real issue.
As an aside, John has the rep of a good teacher and you couldn't do better than him for learning Scruggs, and everybody should take lessons like that. It is must know info for any serious picker. But if you think your picking is bad now, will adding all that elegant Scruggs info really and truly make you play better? If you are having a hard time learning to juggle three balls, would adding three more be a good strategy? (Also, I have to say that it takes a lot of courage to have your picking criticized by people who have never even heard it. Banjo pickers are REALLY sensitive about that; it's kind of strange how the banjo affects people.)
What about my tennis questions? If we saw a video of you on the court, would it look as stiff and frozen as a video of you playing the banjo? I think the real answer to your questions about the banjo would jump out at you, if you sat back and looked objectively. Then you wouldn't have to listen to all this contradictory advice.
Dave Magram - Posted - 03/13/2011: 10:59:06
quote:
Originally posted by minstrelmike
People in 'real' painting course such as ones at a college do study the masters IN ADDITION to doing their own still lifes…. The study of masters is one component, never the only one.
Yep. I agree.
quote:
Originally posted by minstrelmike
And they do their own still lifes before they study the masters, then they study the masters, then they do their own still lifes again.
Nope. Not true at the “real painting courses” at my son’s university.
Your beliefs do not fit the facts, Mike.
quote:
Originally posted by minstrelmike
Dave, like many of the folks who think there is one true path, ignores the other things that are going on in the training of the folks who become successful.
Please don’t ascribe to me things I have never said, Mike.
I have never said that my recommendation is the "one true path".
On the other hand—you seem to have done so many times with your continual and unique recommendation that beginners should buy songbooks and just roll through the chords.
I’m not knocking it, Mike, because I’ve never tried it. However, I have never heard of any established instructor like Wernick, Trischka, Henry, etc. recommending this approach.
My recommendation is simply to learn the way the best players did.
What I
have said many times on many different threads, is that if all of the great banjo-players like Crowe, Stanley, Osborne, Keith, etc have learned Scruggs-style by transcribing (either written or not) Earl’s solos, that perhaps that might be the most effective way to learn—
if one aspires to emulate or sound like Earl.And if you don’t aspire to sound like Earl, fine—don’t do it their way.
quote:
Originally posted by minstrelmike
If you never create something on your own, I don't think you learn nearly as much from intensive study of other people's creations, At best, you become a well-informed critic.
You still have not answered my question, Mike, so I’ll ask it again…
Which of these players-- Crowe, Stanley, Osborne, Keith—would you say have had their creativity hampered the most by their intensive study of Earl Scruggs’ musical creations?
-Dave
Edited by - Dave Magram on 03/13/2011 11:10:46
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/13/2011: 11:09:30
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
Please don’t misquote me to bolster your own opinions, Rich.
I said: “And what evidence do you have that the majority of banjo players do not aspire to play in a band someday?”
I did not say “professional bluegrass band”-- you did.
Here's your quote that started this discussion:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
For those of us who aspire to playing in a hard-driving traditional bluegrass band that is good enough to perform at festivals or bars for money, it matters a lot.
In my world, "for money" means "professional."
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
If you asked that same golf pro how many of his students aspire to be the best golfers in their team, foursome, or local club, I’d expect his answer to be “100%”.
No, most would say that their student's goals are to get to the next plateau. If they're shooting 110, they want to be able to break 100 consistently. If they're breaking 100, they want to be able to break 95 or 90 consistently, etc.
Most of all, they want to have fun consistently. Same with the banjo.
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/13/2011: 11:34:21
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Magram
On the other hand—you seem to have done so many times with your continual and unique recommendation that beginners should buy songbooks and just roll through the chords.
I’m not knocking it, Mike, because I’ve never tried it. However, I have never heard of any established instructor like Wernick, Trischka, Henry, etc. recommending this approach.
I doubt Mike needs me to defend him on this point, but many beginner bluegrass banjo instruction books start with strumming the chords of various familiar songs. Look at Fred Sokolow's "Complete Bluegrass Banjo Method," pp. 8-9; Hal Leonard Banjo Method, Book 1, pp. 6-12. Even "Earl Scruggs and the 5-String Banjo" starts with strumming before picking (pp. 43-44).
It's interesting that you mention Pete Wernick. His instructional method bears little, if any, similarity to what you are recommending. Then again, I don't think he is focusing primarily on those who qualify under your definition of the "serious bluegrass banjo player," e.g., those "who would like to sound like Earl." Hopefully, Pete (a BHO member) or Ira Gitlin (a certified Wernick instructor) will speak to this point themselves.
minstrelmike - Posted - 03/13/2011: 11:43:50
Dave keeps misinterpreting my writing which is why I don't argue with him and merely explain to the rest of the readers. (If he can't understand the first post, I have little hope of providing enlightenment thru subsequent ones).
You do -not- get creativity from others.
Nor does investigating other people's creativity interfere with yours, something Dave seems to have gleaned from what I wrote when he has actually invented that criticism in his own mind.
You do -not- get creativity from others. If you learn their breaks then you have copied, not learned. If you can understand the difference between their breaks and some other professional's breaks, then you have learned critiquing and can possibly mix and match licks but you still haven't received the basic knowledge.
What is it that determines whether one lick matches and another doesn't?
It is the melody. Nothing else.
If you don't start with melody, then all you have is copies. If you start with melody, then you can analyze the interpretations of others but I don't believe true learning occurs until you can analyze what others do in respect to what you yourself do.
Dave can reinterpret my words however he wants.
If you can't yet tell the difference between a melody and an arrangement, copying more arrangements isn't going to help with that particular skill. If you can, then studying the players you like will help. But not before.
Everything in its time.
Who did Earl copy to start with?
What musical skills did J.D. _already_ have before he started copying Earl?
Everything in its time.
Edited by - minstrelmike on 03/13/2011 11:48:59
Rich Weill - Posted - 03/13/2011: 12:07:20
Mike, I'm sure you are familiar with the teaching philosophy of Alan Munde, which has been quoted as follows:
"We're going to put our fingers exactly where Earl put his fingers. And after you learn exactly where Earl put his fingers, then you might understand why he did it. Then you can go off on your own."
Assuming that sufficient attention is paid to the part about trying to "understand why he did it," do you have any disagreement with this as an approach. I'm not saying the only approach, but as one viable approach for those who want to create in the Scruggs vernacular.
Page: 1 2 3
